Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Eric - that's possible, and surely on some level, true. On the other hand, your brother-in-law, is suggesting that there is a way beyond the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, in which any measuring device we use to determine the nature of an entity effects the nature of the entity. (Which we may be seeing here regarding all these definitions of aiki).

Regarding Ueshiba, however, I don't quite see how what your bro-in-law states translates - the limit of a simile is that it is bounded by the degree of similitude.

Are you referring to the observor effect? That isn't quite what the bro-in-law was getting at. He was saying that the way particles and waves are defined mean they are insufficient to explain light. It isn't that light is both a particle and a wave, it is neither, and the concepts of particle and wave are insufficient. They work well when talking about sound, ocean waves, molecules of water, dust, but they don't work well for light.

I see that as being a worthwhile point to consider. Fire-water, heaven-earth, dual spirals, in-yo, Izanagi-Izanumi, triangle-square-circle, kototama, shihonage, push tests, reverse breathing, none of these are sufficient to explain what Ueshiba meant by aiki. Each might explain some tiny facet, but adding them all together doesn't equal aiki any more than particle plus wave equals light. That means any time he uses these terms, they will be inexact representations of aiki. So, my line of thinking is that it is likely he recognized the inconsistencies in what he was saying, but there wasn't really a good way around it.

Nah - I do not think he saw any inconsistency whatsoever. That's the whole point.
Only we do.

Ellis Amdur

I agree with Ellis. I believe that Morihei Ueshiba was using a certain kind of what has been called 'cultural logic' and I also believe that this is very hard for people to grasp, especially those who have been brought up to think in another kind of cultural logic.

Again - because I'm sure this will be misinterpreted by someone - that light is both wave and particle in nature does not mean that it is" half wave" and "half particle." Nor is it "both." It is, simultaneously, 100% each.
Ellis Amdur

Quote:

Peter A Goldsbury wrote:

I agree with Ellis. I believe that Morihei Ueshiba was using a certain kind of what has been called 'cultural logic' and I also believe that this is very hard for people to grasp, especially those who have been brought up to think in another kind of cultural logic.

I think Ellis's analogy is actually pretty profound.

The mathematics of quantum theory is precise and extremely accurate, and mostly unambiguous: in particular, it has little to say about whether a photon is a wave or a particle. It is only those of us in the "real" world who insist on trying to describe tiny particles using languages that have evolved in the human-sized universe, and so get flummoxed when an entity like a photon appears to sit simultaneously in what seem to us incompatible categories.

I don't speak Japanese, but I know enough to understand that exact translation between languages, especially of the esoteric sayings of Morihei Ueshiba, is often impossible, since the meanings of words tend to be highly dependent on the cultural context. Peter's differences in "cultural logic" between Ueshiba's world and ours are a little like the artificial paradoxes that occur when we try to describe quantum behaviour using English (or even Japanese or Urdu).

using esoteric and religous names for martial arts aren't new. the chinese did it for awhile. for example, "buddha warrior attendant pounding the crap out of you" or "kwan yin (goddes of mercy) brushes her hair and put on make-up" and so on. doesn't mean it religious. mostly it sounded cool which is better than pounding your head and kick your balls. vanity is part of asian heritage. don't take it too seriously.

Phi - It's not true, in general regarding Asian traditional martial arts (in the two koryu I'm licensed, the names chosen for waza or kata have multi-layered meanings).
And in regards to Ueshiba, it's definitely not true.
You are asserting that Ueshiba meant nothing by his spiritual references. That is not born out by the facts. Terry Dobson described traveling with him and he stated that every night he spent the bulk of the night praying.

Eric - that's possible, and surely on some level, true. On the other hand, your brother-in-law, is suggesting that there is a way beyond the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, in which any measuring device we use to determine the nature of an entity effects the nature of the entity. (Which we may be seeing here regarding all these definitions of aiki).

The observer effect is not actually related to the uncertainty principle. Heisenberg offered the observer effect as an incorrect explanation for the uncertainty principle. He did not understand that the difficulty he was having simultaneously and precisely observing position and momentum in particles was due to inherent properties of quantum systems.

The observer effect is not inescapable in most observations, and in systems in which it is a factor, it can be adjusted for by including the observer in the system studied. Even in quantum mechanics, in which the effect is inevitable and large, the effect is understandable enough to be controlled for.

There does seem to be a huge and necessary observer effect in human interactions, and human psychology is such an imprecise field that providing controls is very difficult, impractical in daily, non-experimental interactions.

I do take your point and agree with it about the observer effect and the aiki wars, I am just so much of a geek that I cannot let a common misconception about the uncertainty principle lie. The brother in law is not rewriting physics.

How many martial artists did/do the same thing as Ueshiba? There are so many examples it's hardly worth mentioning.
How is it that Takeda had solo training drills to produce (as Sagawa noted) an aiki body for power and told Sagawa not to talk about it....yet. he also said with aiki he could read minds and sort pout peoples skills on site using "aiki?"

The founder of a Koryu discussed Heaven/Earth/Men producing power that made his Ken unstoppable and then later in life discussed Heaven/Earth/Man as a way to be one with the universe and embrace your role as a true human being.

You might as well quote Kondo and a famous Koryu teacher who both say (with a sword in their hand) that budo is about living and not dying..

It's equally fascinating to meet, hear and read the many definitions of yin and yang offered by some of the ICMA master level guys who have power as well. Particularly when they wax on about the grand universal ideas of yin/yang theory and Qi affecting entire countries persona, down to communities, down to families and then. to individuals.

Then....They get into practical use of Yin/yang and qi in a martial art and what they then say, makes very real practical results for physical power and disruptive movement. As stated Takeda and Sagawa had solo training as aiki to produce power and low and behold so did Ueshiba. And they all called it aiki as well.

So when asked, all of the above examples would give an expansive wonderful and pithy commentary on their particular shtick being grand, multi-facted, multi-layered, and a deep and worthy life long pursuit. How many people want to say "I spent my life studying better ways to kill people."

It is interesting to note Inue (quoting Ueshiba) saying that due to the loss in WW2, he thought he had to remove budo from the name. And much of Ueshiba's "aiki is love" rhetoric really started to crank up.

So hearing any individual teacher (with power) discuss common terms that are known for producing power then wax on about his grand vision is a twice told tale

I think i'ts fine that people have discovered all sorts of things in their Aikido:
Aiki is love
Aiki will change the world
The verbal interaction at work as aiki
Remaining centered with an attacker or even an angry wife as aiki. And I am NOT down playing that skill either
Aikido is big and there is a lot in it that is fun, that is healing, and that builds community.None of which ever explained Ueshiba's power.

What actually did produce his power he defined as well.
We do have documented and known terms that he also used as descriptions of aiki, and he used them specifically when being asked about martial usage. The terms he used were known for developing physical power.
Remove the internal practices he described and you will find that Ueshiba's colorful versions of grander aiki have not produced his power in anyone. Not that that is a bad thing. But if you are looking for it, you are not going to find it in his lofty ideas.

Anyone can establish equal value on the term "aiki" or yin and yang just by agreeing to agree. Aiki is loveAiki produces an atemi that is lethal
Standing in the midst of Heaven/earth/man releases the mountain echoNot the weight of a feather can be added, nor can a fly alight that does not induce rotation.
Through change, ten thousand endings, but only through one theory, the union of opposites

Which one(s) addresses the state of man, which one(s) are a very practical means to deliver disruptive power?

Personal choices:
*Just a little side note: In the past no one used to tackle the missing power issue. It is routinely skirted around. Ueshiba produced power. He discussed that as aiki as well, didn't he? Yet, for decades...no...discussion about how that aiki was supposed to be created. Instead everyone just bragged on him as amazing and then went back to "Aiki is love," "Aiki is evading."
Fine by me, but it is damn peculiar that to date I've never met anyone who had unusual power who got it by following "aiki is love" or "yin and yang makes you one with the universe."
But they keep saying it..
However you...can get it...by understanding the terms Ueshiba used, what they meant and how to train them.

I can understand if people want to make the case that the vast majority of people in TMA don't really want unusual power or even argue that it simply doesn't exist (that's the new rhetoric about Ueshiba as well, that he really was not unusual). I know quite few people who are very happy with their practices, as is.
But they certainly cannot make the case that aiki is love ever got Ueshiba or any other live human being the sort of unusual physical power Ueshiba was noted for. Not that there's anything wrong with that either. As we can see, today many people could care less.

Nah - I do not think he saw any inconsistency whatsoever. That's the whole point.
Only we do.

Ellis Amdur

Quote:

Peter A Goldsbury wrote:

I agree with Ellis. I believe that Morihei Ueshiba was using a certain kind of what has been called 'cultural logic' and I also believe that this is very hard for people to grasp, especially those who have been brought up to think in another kind of cultural logic.

Best wishes,

Fair enough, perhaps he did have it all figured out and was able to explain it perfectly. I am content if we agree to disagree on this point.

I think i'ts fine that people have discovered all sorts of things in their Aikido:
Aiki is love
Aiki will change the world
The verbal interaction at work as aiki
Remaining centered with an attacker or even an angry wife as aiki. And I am NOT down playing that skill either
Aikido is big and there is a lot in it that is fun, that is healing, and that builds community.None of which ever explained Ueshiba's power.

I don't think this thread is trying to explain Ueshiba's physical "power." I think doing so would derail this language discussion. If you wish to discuss that particular topic any further, please start a new thread.

I don't think this thread is trying to explain Ueshiba's physical "power." I think doing so would derail this language discussion. If you wish to discuss that particular topic any further, please start a new thread.

-- Jun

Okay then. I can see leaving out explaining his power.
But it would seem relevant to be quoting him answering questions on what aiki is by:
Drawing a circle and explaining Aiki is opposing powers.
OrThe mysteries of aiki are revealed in dual opposing spirals..I'll leave that unfinished yet it is a body method for producing power.
Or when asked describing detailed Chinese terminology for martial movement...as aiki.

I think we should at least agree that Ueshiba used the term aiki to describe his physical power repeatedly and it's use in interacting in martial movement? Stating things like "once you move this way, no one can stop you." should at least offer value to a relevant discussion on Morihei Ueshiba's Use of the Term "Aiki"

No need to discuss what it means or how to do it, just that when asked... he did say these things were aiki.
Dan

Phi - It's not true, in general regarding Asian traditional martial arts (in the two koryu I'm licensed, the names chosen for waza or kata have multi-layered meanings).
And in regards to Ueshiba, it's definitely not true.
You are asserting that Ueshiba meant nothing by his spiritual references. That is not born out by the facts. Terry Dobson described traveling with him and he stated that every night he spent the bulk of the night praying.
Ellis Amdur

i stand rightly corrected. question for you or those who know, does the usage of religious teminologies/names have some implication on philosophy as well as technical in martial techniques/principles?

People, (after I noticed the quote in Alan Ruddock's account) quote Ueshiba as saying that "you do not understand yin and yang" (actually, he said, Izanagi and Izanami, and it would be facile to assert that there are no nuances of difference here - it was changed to the former because the interlocutor decided that people wouldn't understand and they were, after all,in his opinion, the same).

I've heard this before, but what's the source? Is there original Japanese somewhere, and is that it?

I ask because as you say, I think it's important. So far as I can tell, when O-Sensei went off on Izanagi and Izanami he was talking about dual opposing spirals--a concept which includes yin and yang but adds layers of complexity, and makes this particular quote much more specific to the IS/IP skills.

Quote:

Ellis Amdur wrote:

Since Ueshiba apparently chose to apply a term to a number of apparently different, even contradictory experiences, thoughts, attitudes, I doubt very much that were he less bewildered, he might have called his spiritual ideas, for one example, by some other term. On the contrary, I think it's clear, despite others' wishes to the contrary, that for him, aiki had the same nature, despite its different forms and all his different assertions.

Quote:

Dan Harden wrote:

So when asked, all of the above examples would give an expansive wonderful and pithy commentary on their particular shtick being grand, multi-facted, multi-layered, and a deep and worthy life long pursuit. How many people want to say "I spent my life studying better ways to kill people."

Which doesn't necessarily make the spiritual insight irrelevant. Nor does O-Sensei's experiences in WW2--especially if he really was close to some of the more nationalistic elements in Japan before the war--mean that the spiritual insights he came to aren't valid. People are allowed to mature as they age.

But the point you raise about power is, I think, critical for considering the relationship between aiki the marital skill and aiki as spiritual enlightenment. The people you mention came to the spiritual insight through development of the body skill which led to physical power. Is that a coincidence?

There are all kinds of spiritual insight placing us in relationship to the divine, however you understand that. What's unique about this particular path? Does it matter that it's based on mastery over the self and the imposition of harmony on the self ("imposition" in that it doesn't happen naturally--you have to work at it), and the use of that organized, centered self to impose order on the world? ("Impose" in this sense being different from "force"--just as I can't force a technique, but have to allow it to happen through the use of my organized body and movement.)

And what about the converse? If you pursue a martial art which is centered on power but not aiki (karate, boxing), what spiritual insight comes from that? Looking at the top boxers in the US right now, I'm inclined to say, "not much." What's the difference in power from aiki?

And what if you pursue an art which basically doesn't care about martial effectiveness? Do you end up with an art which produces neither power nor spiritual development? Aiki-no-michi might be a counter-example--anybody have any experience with it?

My own attitude is that body and mind are trained together, and it matters how and with what intent you train the body. And that, I think, leads back to Ellis' point of view, and how O-Sensei could refer to these very different things as "aiki"--and why he could promote Aikido as an art of love--not because you could avoid the hard work but because through the hard work you got achieve spiritual enlightenment.

I'd note that nobody has argued against the validity or utility of moving around, evading, jumping, dodging or any related action as a martial tactic. If you watch Shirata (the source of that "immovable body" quote) you'll notice that he moves about quite a bit.

The difference of opinion comes as to what the definition of "Aiki" is - saying that "Aiki" isn't evasion doesn't mean that evasion is wrong, or even inadvisable. Donuts aren't "Aiki" either, but where would my day be without them?

To the people who think that all definitions of "Aiki" out to be accepted, that it's all good, what if I said something like "I was walking down the street and I turned to a teenager who was annoying me, kicked him in the nuts and broke both his arms, what wonderful Aiki!". Wouldn't you feel obligated to say something?

Best,

Chris

Quote:

Ron Ragusa wrote:

"When an opponent comes to attack you, you just move your body slightly to avoid his attack, and let him go wherever he wants. This is Aiki. In other words, you give him freedom." - Morihei Ueshiba

So is he wrong then?

Ron

1. First, "aiki" is used by aikido people in much the same manner as "smurf" is used by the Smurfs. I think it is a loose term impregnated with personal belief and ideology. Because of the grip on personal and ideological perspective, we are hesitant to curtail the usage of the word.

2. There are first and second-hand accounts of the usage from O'Sensei. First-hand accounts (from O'Sensei) are in Japanese and require translation. By all accounts, to the West, the usage requires a cultural filter (both social and spiritual).

Now...

I assume the consistent use of "aiki" by O'Sensei implies that the seemingly paradoxical (or at least non-linear) contexts in which he used "aiki" were, in fact, intentional. This is a big component for my acceptance of a definition that needs to be specific enough as to be a definition, but flexible enough to encompass a myriad of perspectives.

I use the term "agape", I have also heard "empathy". The ability to understand and appreciate the object and advocate its relative position. It is this relationship that empowers me to physically (and non-physically) be invested in the general well-being of the object of my empathy, while still aligning my actions with my preservation. For now, this is the concept I believe O'Sensei intended when he used the term "aiki."

While this is stuff for another thread, I think it's very interesting. I have been making a study of Tomiki Sensei's work of late, I've found it very enlightening!

That is a whole issue in itself - many see Tomiki as randori forgetting that he was probably the most studied of the lot. He immersed himself in the Omoto-kyo writings to better understand Ueshiba ( his dojo still has the Omoto-kyo shrine) and to say he was just after a collection of techniques to supplement his judo really does not do him justice. Pigeon holing people and ideas is a weakness shared by all.

Peter G. years ago gave me a copy of Tomiki's Budo-ron. By coincidence I was looking at it this morning while separating books to be chucked and those to immigrate with me to the UK in just over 2 weeks. I wish that text would be translated but alas not yet.

Peter G. years ago gave me a copy of Tomiki's Budo-ron. By coincidence I was looking at it this morning while separating books to be chucked and those to immigrate with me to the UK in just over 2 weeks.

If you find any Aikido books that are not going to make the migration- I'll send you shipping to "chuck" them my way!

1. First, "aiki" is used by aikido people in much the same manner as "smurf" is used by the Smurfs. I think it is a loose term impregnated with personal belief and ideology. Because of the grip on personal and ideological perspective, we are hesitant to curtail the usage of the word.

2. There are first and second-hand accounts of the usage from O'Sensei. First-hand accounts (from O'Sensei) are in Japanese and require translation. By all accounts, to the West, the usage requires a cultural filter (both social and spiritual).

Now...

I assume the consistent use of "aiki" by O'Sensei implies that the seemingly paradoxical (or at least non-linear) contexts in which he used "aiki" were, in fact, intentional. This is a big component for my acceptance of a definition that needs to be specific enough as to be a definition, but flexible enough to encompass a myriad of perspectives.

I use the term "agape", I have also heard "empathy". The ability to understand and appreciate the object and advocate its relative position. It is this relationship that empowers me to physically (and non-physically) be invested in the general well-being of the object of my empathy, while still aligning my actions with my preservation. For now, this is the concept I believe O'Sensei intended when he used the term "aiki."

Who is convincing you that a cultural filter is needed all the time, and who is capable of providing it? Most of Ueshiba's own people immersed in his culture couldn't help could they? Yet Shirata could and he went out of his way to also explain it in practical terms clearly laid out.
The fact that someone can translate is only a starting point, and many times they offer steps in the wrong direction. *Cultural* references are not always relevant and not always germane to individual references found in the writings from any *single* culture IE the six direction training thread. Two translators couldn't help at all. They didn't ask, nor did they know that:

The term itself had a well established meaning

That it spanned hundreds of years

That it was used throughout *three* cultures.

That it was a distinctly martial reference

It's the same with aiki.
Ueshiba and Shirata both discussed practical means for creating aiki in a physical senseAiki is opposing powers
The mysteries of aiki are revealed in dual opposing spirals
Aiki is unification of the two ki's as opposing forces expressed through heaven/ earth/ man
Understanding Heaven and earth ki, stand on the floating bridge and release the mountain echo.
five and five makes ten, eight and two make ten
Stand and meet the enemy with guest hand and host hand.
These are NOT spiritual references, they are hitherto known and documented means to generate power. These guys were quoting known martial references

Martial and spiritual combine overlap and interplay throughout generations.
Everyone couched their martial terms in spiritual pursuits. Where did the founder of shinto ryu discover Heaven/ earth/ man and six direction training?
At the Katori shrine!!

Where do you find many of the references for internal training in India? Bhuddism.

There is no doubt what so ever that Ueshiba was a spiritual man and that he saw his aiki both as a martial skill and as something greater than a physical confrontation. I still find it interesting Both he and Shirata connected it to a way to live their life and pray to be one with God...through aiki.

Does one discount the other?
There is an interest in discussing the aiki people know
And the ones they cannot explain...are the very ones that gave Ueshiba power

If you find any Aikido books that are not going to make the migration- I'll send you shipping to "chuck" them my way!

That one went to the sea voyage pile.

With respect to the term Aiki - I doubt that even in historical times, in cultural context, it had any clear meaning. Much as I like and can relate to some of those historical definitions the terms use was more broad - almost like a catch-all. Ueshiba if anything was even less precise.

For anyone to say what Ueshiba actually meant requires a lot of assumption (presumption).